Over three years that's like $150-$200 total and it will save you so many headaches. But that's a steep price? Are you kidding? Why do developers hate tools that cost money when they save them time and allow them to do more?
A language that depends too much on IDE integration for usability is a real problem, because now you have tool fragmentation as everyone goes different routes with varying levels of success to fix the deficiencies in your language. In the end you end up rolling your own tools as I have done, which is the absolute WORST of all worlds.
Go was supposed to be simple, but all it succeeded in doing is shifting the complexity elsewhere and calling mission accomplished. When you're designing a language, it's VERY important to understand the difference between the emergent complexity of the domain, and the inherent complexity of your design. The latter can be fixed, the former can only be managed - in ways that are already well researched (or just swept under the rug, as go has done).
Too much magic and too much "clever" re-purposing of existing paradigms (file names, capitalization, implicit contracts, etc) makes for an infuriatingly bad design.
IDE dependence is not.
I like working with Free and Open software much more than proprietary software. I think it's important for society, and I have more fun that way too!
Also the payoff for me has been very good, I can learn emacs once and enjoy using it for the rest of my life for all significant written language tasks on a computer.
Perhaps I could be a little more efficient if I were using a jetbrains IDE, but then I wouldn't like what I was doing as much. Enjoying what I do, even if it may look slightly contrived to others, is important in me achieving results at work.
It's not perfect but better than your typical closed source software.
Everytime I have to use VSC to develop typescript and angular, I am having problems with finding definitions (works 30% of the time), code search (it takes longer due to the constricted interface), git operations (want to do more than a simple pull and push? good luck), and much more. WebStorm on the other hand has a lot less bugs, a more flexible interface, and more features. I am glad that people make an effort to make an IDE instead of an editor with IDE-style features and I'll gladly pay a very small amount of my salary to them.
Every workshop has higher costs than a software developer. Imagine a car mechanic propping up a car with 2 by 4 because they use what's available for free. No, they buy their $30,000 lift because they need it to get their work done quicker.
This is a far from convincing argument. Jetbrains IDEs are not the equivalent of a professional lift and the competing (often free) products are not the equivalent of a 2x4.
Is Jetbrains good? Well, I've used it for Java and was pretty impressed.
Is it $199/year[1] better than the free stuff? Well many people don't think so. It's fine if you only every use a single stack, but most of us use multiple languages and multiple stacks, now you're looking at $649/year (see link below) for all tools. Considering that my current personal development computer cost less than that years ago, is it now wonder that the price is considered too much?
I think the problem is that developers are looking at the Jetbrains products and comparing it to the value they get from other development purchases.
Compare:
A single $1k computer will last for many years, do every single development task needed to make money, be used for entertainment, and write all the actual software that will be sold. When it is too slow for dev (in a decade from now), it'll be repurposed for something else.
A single annual payment of $649 to JB results in a tiny increase in dev speed, which will disappear at the end of the year anyway. It won't make the code more robust, it won't help solve business problems any faster, it will only make code navigation faster.
For a dev, look what $1000 buys, and then look at JB for $650, and it doesn't look like all that good value for money anymore.
[1] the cost for Goland at https://www.jetbrains.com/go/buy/#commercial
The individual-license pack for all of their IDEs would set you back $250 as opposed to $650 commercial license.
I used to use "IDEA Ultimate", which is 30% cheaper than the All-Pack and supports installation of most of the other language plugins, allowing me to use a single IDE for everything. Nowadays I'm using separate IDEs as that seems to work faster.
I personally find the price worth it, as even a simple "expand selection scope" operation which I use many times per day just doesn't feel right in VS Code.
I stand by my 2 by 4 comment because they get the work done, just slower and more awkward. It's always super amusing how software developers with one of the highest salaries around the world (yes, even in poorer regions) complain about costs when other jobs require tens of thousands in initial investment.
Currently that shows a cost of 250 euros per year, or about 20 euros per month (excluding VAT which varies).
For most developers, that is indeed a relatively small amount (even I opted for the ultimate package, despite earning in the low 2 figures in Latvia), whereas the 650 euros for commercial licenses would be doable for any organization that cares about their developers' experience.
All of that is excluding their loyalty discounts, programs for students and non-profits, startups etc.: https://www.jetbrains.com/go/buy/#discounts?billing=yearly
Personally, whenever I see commercial software or a SaaS/PaaS/IaaS solution, I'm tempted to throw a brick through someone's window (figuratively) because those are likely to result in unreasonable amounts of vendor lock (especially with cloud services around Kubernetes management), but personally I haven't found a better IDE than what JetBrains offer.
For Java, all of the alternatives are worse: Eclipse is buggy and crashes (though some swear by its incremental compiler and integrations), NetBeans is kind of dated and struggles with projects that have 4000+ source files (though it's cool that Apache keeps it alive and there's the whole module enable/disable functionality and their VisualVM integration is great).
For .NET, Rider is easily up there with Visual Studio, even when you're doing something more niche, like working with the Unity game engine (the performance hints are nice), or just working on .NET apps.
For PHP, Ruby, Go, Python and other languages their tools feel competent and oftentimes suggest you whatever it is that you might want to do, be it setting up your runtimes properly, your dependency management systems, install all of the dependencies, import the project config/launch profiles etc.
For Node/JavaScript I have never found a good IDE, but maybe that's because the language is sometimes a mess to work with - e.g. getting only some very basic completion in some garbage 3000 line AngularJS controller because even the IDE has no idea what the hell is going on there, or having Vue 3 use the <script> tag for adding code imports, instead of detecting that i'd like to use <script setup> but then again, they're pretty speedy with updates and if you don't do anything too crazy with projects, then it should be good.
I don't have much experience with their C/C++ offerings, or their lightweight text editor (Fleet) or the likes of DataSpell, though their DB management offering, DataGrip is pretty okay too! Though you can also configure the individual IDEs like IntelliJ to show up hints for most decent frameworks.
If we refuse to buy products then we end up with companies offering just services with vendor lock in. Well...we already sort of ended up in such world.
As I wanted the real deal and not a bunch of no name floppies with copied manuals.
That would be around 150 euros, without taking into account the inflation to modern days.
And to place the price in perspective, it was a third of the minimum wage, while the overall cost of my PC took 5 years for my parents to pay back to the bank.
If a language requires some IDE to make it usable, then I put it in the same camp as Java: Hope the competition are using it.
I don't duplicate anything, my CI/CD pipelines consume MSBuild, Ant, Gradle, Maven, CMake, XCode, package.json, gulp, webpack files just as easy as my IDEs.
Mainframes and embedded OSes, the latter with much more market share than all desktops together.
Unfortunately English comprehension skills is a lost art.
Xerox PARC already showed how.
Because as messy as Java is, refactoring codebases in it that have been kept alive for close to a decade is surprisingly not madness-inducing (most of the time), at least in some of the sane frameworks. Apart from, you know, legacy projects basically killing your career in the long term.
I'm not sure what other language I'd feel comfortable with changing how some method works across 50 other places that call it and have the IDE do most of the heavy lifting.
Yes, I have Stockholm syndrome, probably. Yes, I'd prefer to retire to planting potatoes in a farm, rather than work with NullPointerExceptions.
Arguing we should also buy every Jetbrains product is like arguing carpenters should buy line drawing AR goggles. Perhaps some will see the value in it, but it's far from an noncontroversial POV. If you feel a tool as as much downsides than upsides in your workflow, you don't use it, whatever its price is.
Yeah ok.
I ran JetBrains software on one of those 1.5ghz MacBook 12” and it was totally fine.
I don’t think it needs “powerful” hardware.
Not like visual studio. Now that’s a pain!
That depends. If you have multiple large projects open at the same time, it'll eat a lot of RAM, even if it won't be too CPU intensive.
I run it on a ThinkPad that has 32 GB of RAM, when I have about 6-7 instances of the IDE open and all of these services running locally (generally Java projects, the largest of which is around 4000+ source files), then it gets close to the resource limits.
Switching between Visual Studio is 15-20 seconds of wait time while it decides if any files have changed.
Whatever makes them happy and productive, that's great. I've seen people use Vim and its crazy how productive some people are with it.
My point is complaining about the price of some software like it's blocking them from doing anything. They spend all this money on all this hardware and software, but when it comes to development, oh it costs too much I don't want to pay $90 for something to earn money...
This feels pretty weird to be faulted for using other companies' products. And no, switching to Jetbrains' doesn't make me more money. Could be the reverse from my past trials.
↑ that was in my answer (with the typo, on the “as as” instead of “has as”, my bad)
You might be confounding mine with another comment. I recognize the talent and expertise of JetBrain’s staff, but don’t like their products in general, and use VSCode as a primary editor, and (paid) Textmate for the rest.
To your general point, looking at project like Bitwarden, with their initial kickstarter and their current revenue, I don’t feel like people are restraining from paying for useful software, even when it has a generous free tier.
If you want your employees to be productive, you provide them tools to achieve that, otherwise you get what you pay for.
It's the Companies that are acting entitled in this situation, not the workers.
2. Physical tools vs making copies of some bytes. No need to retread this here, but bottom line: Not comparable.
Programmers are toolmakers, and are therefore harsh critics of tools they use; just like a carpenter will tell you everything that's wrong with the design, and choice of wood that went into a pricey, but ultimately-affordable-to-a-carpenter bench top. Having access to cheaper, good-enough alternatives is part of it.
I'm not writing my own IDE or my own database. I can, and I have, in times past. I do pay for tools that I need.
This is where the analogy breaks down, but they'd likely download a free one made by a consortium of other carpenters, which can be customized to their needs
> I do pay for tools that I need.
As have I: I was paying JetBrains yearly until they published plans to brick my IDE if I dared stopped sending them money. They walked this back after an uproar - but that episode showed me that I was also playing in their sandbox and subject to their every whim. I now default to using tools that can be forked at a moments notice (by myself or others)
Also, JetBrains IDEs were far ahead of the competition back then. For the tech stack and codebases I now work on (or perhaps additional experience?), none of the JetBrains IDEs are worth the effort. vim and a handful of plugins & scripts are adequate 95% of the times, VSCode takes me up to 98%, and it's diminishing returns beyond that
That is true, but also in some places that is also the status quo: especially in countries where the developers don't get 6 figure salaries and don't create as much value to their respective companies.
if they can't justify paying ~$100 for my ide of choice, then they are costing them selves far more in lost productivity, and that's not my problem.
Not saying Company should not pay that, but it's not $100
But the philosophy I always had was that as long as there were enough people like you paying for software, I wouldn't have to.
Friend of mine pirated photoshop when he was studying and after he finished and started his own business he started paying for it.
But I'm not sure any IDE is worth $90/year when VS Code is free. The extensions for VS Code are next-level, especially the SSH extension. No other IDE comes remotely close to how well that extension works for its use case.